anniej

Comments by anniej

Sweetwater board candidate has his sign damaged

ED BRAND WILL BE EVALUATED IN ITEM #6 OF THE CLOSED SESSION MONDAY EVENING. please plan to attend and voice your opinions. after reading the many many pdf's that have been provided by the union tribune i would like to offer my opinion on a few items i have read: - it appears that selection committees meant nothing to 'the gandara' - if he did not like the committees choice, he simply tore it up and brought forth his own choice. this is interesting since, as reported by the north county times that was ONE of the controversial reasons why ed brand left his position as superintendent up there. additionally we have had our own RECENT issue with this same situation - it was the prop o bond oversight committee new member selection process. in april it was reported that a selection committee had sent forth 2 candidates for the vacant positions, however, ed brand, for whatever reasons chose to bless but one of them. a Mr. Clapper, who is highly regarded in the south bay did not receive the blessing. the question remains, WHY DID ED BRAND INTERJECT HIMSELF INTO THE PROCESS WHEN HE HAD ADVISED THE COMMUNITY THAT NEITHER THE BOARD OR HIMSELF WOULD BE INVOLVED. - throughout the grand jury testimonies a name keeps popping up Ed B, (aka Arlie Ricasa's husband). according to certain persons who testified they kept track of the goings on at sweetwater via Mr. B. he seemed to have an inside tract regarding contracts, who was mad at who, etc. so my question is simple why? why is a board members spouse viewed as an integral piece of the puzzle. surely closed session items are not shared. - how long has Jim Cartmill been on the suhsd board? since 1990. we are talking 23+ years. under his representation we had Ed Brand (first time around) leave after a Grand Jury investigation. we had 'the gandara' brought here by Mr. Cartmill and Ricasa, now we have THE LARGEST ALLEGED CORRUPTION CASE IN SAN DIEGO HISTORY and finally we are dealing with Ed Brand yet again. am i the only one who is of the opinion that the time has come for Mr. Cartmill and Ms. Ricasa to turn in their board member seats? their ability to represent long ago left as priority, it was replaced with "what is in it for me"? it is time, time for the community to demand that our board once again replace our superintendent. with each month comes more and more financial decisions that are, at the very least questionable; and the very worst dire. i understand that will have to pay him, what is new? perhaps if board members like Jim Cartmill and Arlie Ricasa were not stale, perhaps, just perhaps they would have chosen a true leader. but instead, there was something about good old ed that these two indicted board members liked. we know Brand helped Cartmill out of his bankruptcy, but there is more. and what about Ricasa, yes what about Ricasa? more to come folks, much more.
— June 14, 2013 8:01 p.m.

Sweetwater board candidate has his sign damaged

We have watched while Ed Brand, Jim Cartmill, John Mccann and Arlie Ricasa VOTED AWAY ADULT ED AND ROP AS WE KNOW IT. Instead Jim Cartmill, John Mccann, and Arlie Ricasa voted to denigrate these two successful options in favor of Ed Brands elementary charter school. Folks, we are paying for this elementary charter, Ed Brand is not, he does not live or pay taxes down here. Brand, who FOR YEARS, spoke out against charter schools all of a sudden had an epiphany and decided that an elementary charter was the way to go. It all has to do with the money folks, he wants the per head count paid by the state - in simple terms. What needs to be discussed is how much is being spent on a charter that is taking money away from our middle and high school students. Let us compare our district to the Chula Vista Elementary district, THEY ARE FINANCIALLY SOLVENT, WE VOTED IN A BOND RECENTLY BECAUSE WE TRUST THEM, AND THEIR STUDENTS ARE EXCELLING. So much so that THEIR middle school charters are successful, and the need ever growing. The super of CV Elementary district is respected and trusted - he is focused on serving the youth and the taxpayers. With one breath we are told by Ed Brand and the board, we are broke, then with the next they are asking for thousands upon thousands of dollars for memberships into organizations such as Chambers of Commerce. I first spoke against this expense back when 'the gandara' was here, I have spoken against it since Brand has been back. Why was Bertha Lopez the ONLY board member to speak out against such spending? These are the issues we need answers to - and we want answers we do NOT want speeches. How can we live in a district where our Elementary School Boards are respected and heralded and our Middle/High School Board is seen as corrupt?
— June 13, 2013 6:25 p.m.

Sweetwater board candidate has his sign damaged

With the trials of those indicted on the forefront, with more and more legislative politicians paying attention and voicing concern, with elections coming up next year it is clearly apparent that certain members of the board are attempting to take the focus OFF of the issues that plague the students and taxpayers by endorsing a certain persons comments. Let us review what we would welcome comments on, for example why Jim Cartmill has failed to bring to the board a policy that would include campaign donation limitations. Ms. Maty Adato has met with Mr. Cartmill, and was promised a policy would be forthcoming, within a week. It never happened. Then right before the next board meeting yet another email promising the policy. No policy. That was over a month and a half ago, and now in 4 days the board will meet again. This issue was brought before the board approximately 2 years ago by a different member of the community. It was not voted on, as a matter of fact, there was NO DISCUSSION, NOT EVEN ONE WORD, and so it died for lack of motion. Fast forward to 2013, the month of May, the Grand Jury testimony is made public - while we realized the whys of the lack of interest by the board we now suspect why Jim Cartmill is failing to bring forward campaign reform He is up for reelection in 2014. as is John Mccann and Arlie Ricasa. Would they dare to replicate their past choices by ASKING for campaign contributions from contractors and vendors yet again? Well let us consider, that according to Ed Brand, John Mccann did just that, within two weeks of Mccann bring Brand back to replace 'the gandara'. According to Rene Flores of SGI not only did Ed Brand ask for John Mccann but he also asked for MONEY for Jim Cartmill - and the year in which he asked, WAS NOT A FREAKIN ELECTION YEAR FOR EITHER OF THEM. And so I will offer up, nothing has changed at Sweetwater and nothing will change at Sweetwater until and unless we are able to FIRE Ed Brand and either have those who fail to vote in favor of education and fiduciary responsibility found guilty or vote them out. Plans are being made to vote Jim Cartmill, John Mccann and Arlie Ricasa OUT next election time, just in case the judicial system is not able to remove them. All reading need to ask the question WHY HAS OUR BOARD, FOR TWO YEARS, FOUGHT CAMPAIGN DONATION REFORM? WHY DID JOHN MCCANN SPEAK AGAINST THE CAMPAIGN REFORM THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY MS. ADATO? No doubt Mr. Cartmill is feeling the heat, many are questioning his delay in acting. Why was the committee to 'study' the issue not ever formed? Mr. Cartmill we are waiting, you need to justify your lack of action. I have no malice for any of the parties that I have spoken out against in truth, I JUST WANT THEM GONE I want them replaced with persons who come to the table to serve our students and the taxpayers - we have, for far too long, had persons sit on the dais and use. THE TIME FOR CHANGE IS NOW!!!!!
— June 13, 2013 3:56 p.m.